Athiest kills 3 Muslims after condemning all religions *tipping intensifies*

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**the shrouded lord**

Peregrine wrote:
the shrouded lord wrote:
I am acually considering making a video showing a bible burning nd then a non-fiction book burning, my point being that even if you believe in the bible there should be no difference.

So you've decided that you want to do something incredibly offensive and provoke people, but you can't even bother to come up with something original?

yes. you know who it will offend? people who think that tiny splothes of ink on a bunch of sheets of paper bound in animal skin is something that their god is concerned with.

**Peregrine**

the shrouded lord wrote:
yes. you know who it will offend? people who think that tiny splothes of ink on a bunch of sheets of paper bound in animal skin is something that their god is concerned with.

Or just people who get your "I don't respect your religion, now let me prove it" message. Seriously, if you want to be offensive at least have the decency to be honest about it instead of pretending that you can't understand how anyone could object. And try to do something a little less cliche than burning a bible.

**the shrouded lord**

Peregrine wrote:
the shrouded lord wrote:
yes. you know who it will offend? people who think that tiny splothes of ink on a bunch of sheets of paper bound in animal skin is something that their god is concerned with.

Or just people who get your "I don't respect your religion, now let me prove it" message. Seriously, if you want to be offensive at least have the decency to be honest about it instead of pretending that you can't understand how anyone could object. And try to do something a little less cliche than burning a bible.

or rather blunt honesty about the ignorance of assuing ones' god gives two gaks about a bunch of words. tho this is the same god that not only approves of but demands the murder of homosexuals, and anyone of differing religion yet refuses to prove his own existance. hnestly if the god depiced in the bible (Bib-lehey) exists, he's either autistic or the single stupidest being to ever exist.

**daedalus**

the shrouded lord wrote:

or rather blunt honesty about the ignorance of assuing ones' god gives two gaks about a bunch of words. tho this is the same god that not only approves of but demands the murder of homosexuals, and anyone of differing religion yet refuses to prove his own existance. hnestly if the god depiced in the bible (Bib-lehey) exists, he's either autistic or the single stupidest being to ever exist.

The point is that you're going through a remarkable amount of effort to prove an otherwise unoriginal point by offending people in the same way people have been offending them for otherwise tedious amounts of time. I have no problem with offending people, and Peregrine certainly doesn't seem to either. Your idea is mindnumbingly trite though.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, you shouldn't use autistic as a slur. Particularly not here. That's uncool in very many ways.

**the shrouded lord**

daedalus wrote:
the shrouded lord wrote:

or rather blunt honesty about the ignorance of assuing ones' god gives two gaks about a bunch of words. tho this is the same god that not only approves of but demands the murder of homosexuals, and anyone of differing religion yet refuses to prove his own existance. hnestly if the god depiced in the bible (Bib-lehey) exists, he's either autistic or the single stupidest being to ever exist.

The point is that you're going through a remarkable amount of effort to prove an otherwise unoriginal point by offending people in the same way people have been offending them for otherwise tedious amounts of time. I have no problem with offending people, and Peregrine certainly doesn't seem to either. Your idea is mindnumbingly trite though.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, you shouldn't use autistic as a slur. Particularly not here. That's uncool in very many ways.

It wasn't a slur.
Altough, perhaps bi-polar would be a better term?

**daedalus**

Might be closer to what you're looking for. The Christian god might be a lot of things, but "autistic" is certainly not a word that I would use to describe it.

The above comment still stands though. Be a little more creative in your outrage-mongering, if that's what you want to do.

**Psienesis**

The best thing about being an atheist is being able to not give a gak about what other people think or believe. People want to believe in sky ghosts, airborne pasta, ancient squids, cosmic turtles, space elephants, or mystic powers from living creatures?

I don't give a feth. More power to them. Literally nothing I say will ever change their minds, and posting juvenile YouTube videos of burning books isn't either.

**reds8n**

If we don't have anything constructive to add then it's much better not to post.

Thank you.

**the shrouded lord**

ahh, right. sorry big red.
anyway I hate the fact that this man killed people, and I hate the fact that religion was his justification. I also hate the fact that this guy makes atheists look bad, in the exact same way any extremist makes his or her religion look bad.

**FoWPlayerDeathOfUS.TDs**

If you read the thread previously you would realize that religion wasnt his reason. He was constantly angry and finally snapped.

Back to the question I was asking though- what legal precedents would it violate? I can think of part 2 of the lemon test, but that is about it.

**Frazzled**

the shrouded lord wrote:
I am acually considering making a video showing a bible burning nd then a non-fiction book burning, my point being that even if you believe in the bible there should be no difference.
Now, believing in something, and supporting it, are different things. for example, I believe in my school's existance, but do not actively support all of it's rules.
Honestly, if a person fully supports (not believes in) the bible, there is something wrong with them.

Burn a Koran. Tell us how that works out. Lets see if President calls and asks you not to.

**the shrouded lord**

Frazzled wrote:
the shrouded lord wrote:
I am acually considering making a video showing a bible burning nd then a non-fiction book burning, my point being that even if you believe in the bible there should be no difference.
Now, believing in something, and supporting it, are different things. for example, I believe in my school's existance, but do not actively support all of it's rules.
Honestly, if a person fully supports (not believes in) the bible, there is something wrong with them.

Burn a Koran. Tell us how that works out. Lets see if President calls and asks you not to.

If extremists come for me I'm moving to alaska and blaming you.

**Frazzled**

the shrouded lord wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
the shrouded lord wrote:
yes. you know who it will offend? people who think that tiny splothes of ink on a bunch of sheets of paper bound in animal skin is something that their god is concerned with.

Or just people who get your "I don't respect your religion, now let me prove it" message. Seriously, if you want to be offensive at least have the decency to be honest about it instead of pretending that you can't understand how anyone could object. And try to do something a little less cliche than burning a bible.

or rather blunt honesty about the ignorance of assuing ones' god gives two gaks about a bunch of words. tho this is the same god that not only approves of but demands the murder of homosexuals, and anyone of differing religion yet refuses to prove his own existance. hnestly if the god depiced in the bible (Bib-lehey) exists, he's either autistic or the single stupidest being to ever exist.

Burn a Bible-all it will do is let everyone know how much of a

er you are. Oh and someone might punch you in the face.
Again, if you want to prove then now burn a Koran. Put it on youtube along with your physical address. What could go wrong?
Or even better you could stick all that nonsense in a hole and go practice random acts of kindness.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

the shrouded lord wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
the shrouded lord wrote:
I am acually considering making a video showing a bible burning nd then a non-fiction book burning, my point being that even if you believe in the bible there should be no difference.
Now, believing in something, and supporting it, are different things. for example, I believe in my school's existance, but do not actively support all of it's rules.
Honestly, if a person fully supports (not believes in) the bible, there is something wrong with them.

Burn a Koran. Tell us how that works out. Lets see if President calls and asks you not to.

If extremists come for me I'm moving to alaska and blaming you.

If you don't like extremists best not to move to Alaska. Also a bad place if you don't like facial hair.

**the shrouded lord**

Frazzled i I burnt any kind of holly book and put my adress with it we both know I would be murdered multiple times.

**Frazzled**

the shrouded lord wrote:
Frazzled i I burnt any kind of holly book and put my adress with it we both know I would be murdered multiple times.

You have books made from Holly?

**the shrouded lord**

Frazzled wrote:
the shrouded lord wrote:
Frazzled i I burnt any kind of holly book and put my adress with it we both know I would be murdered multiple times.

You have books made from Holly?

ink is the blood of christ. to far?

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

Peregrine wrote:
Saudi Arabia is kind of a misleading example because it isn't really a rich country. It's a poor country with massive income inequality that just happened to get lucky and exist on top of a lot of valuable oil. So there are a few people at the top with obscene amounts of money, but the country as a whole has more in common with poor countries than with countries like the US.

It is a culturally backward society, but as far as I can tell, it is a rich country. Not only because of the global amount of money, but also because of how their citizen live. And I must emphasize citizen here: the “slave” class immigrant do not count.

Psienesis wrote:
Islam isn't at war with the rest of the world. If it was, we'd all be dead.

Uh, I am pretty sure you mean Islam would be dead. Because the only Muslim government with access to nuke is Pakistan, and they never got anything to send them further than India because they do not need to.

LordofHats wrote:
the shrouded lord wrote:
I am acually considering making a video showing a bible burning nd then a non-fiction book burning, my point being that even if you believe in the bible there should be no difference.

The secret is to douse the pages in water first Otherwise the whole thing just goes up like a roman candle. Took me about 2 Bibles to get it right, and probably waaaay more time than the A+ was actually worth, but the effect was effective XD

When I burned my Quran, I had to torn out all the pages before…
It would not burn otherwise.

Frazzled wrote:
Burn a Bible-all it will do is let everyone know how much of a er you are. Oh and someone might punch you in the face.
Again, if you want to prove then now burn a Koran. Put it on youtube along with your physical address. What could go wrong?

I laugh at your persecution complex. No, you are not unjustly oppressed.

**LordofHats**

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

When I burned my Quran, I had to torn out all the pages before…

Hey, the King James version ain't worth much anyway

I was doing the Puritans and damn it I was shooting for Authenticity!

**SlaveToDorkness**

the shrouded lord wrote:
tho this is the same god that not only approves of but demands the murder of homosexuals, and anyone of differing religion yet refuses to prove his own existance. hnestly if the god depiced in the bible (Bib-lehey) exists, he's either autistic or the single stupidest being to ever exist.

To paraphrase Dr. Jones Sr.: Goose stepping morons should try reading books instead of burning them.

Your ignorance is appallingly glaring, more so than usual.

**sirlynchmob**

the shrouded lord wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
the shrouded lord wrote:
yes. you know who it will offend? people who think that tiny splothes of ink on a bunch of sheets of paper bound in animal skin is something that their god is concerned with.

Or just people who get your "I don't respect your religion, now let me prove it" message. Seriously, if you want to be offensive at least have the decency to be honest about it instead of pretending that you can't understand how anyone could object. And try to do something a little less cliche than burning a bible.

or rather blunt honesty about the ignorance of assuing ones' god gives two gaks about a bunch of words. tho this is the same god that not only approves of but demands the murder of homosexuals, and anyone of differing religion yet refuses to prove his own existance. hnestly if the god depiced in the bible (Bib-lehey) exists, he's either ...... or the single stupidest being to ever exist.

To be fair though, God comes from a broken home. He never had any parents, not even foster care nor a orphanage to teach him right and wrong. Some people just do not do well in extreme isolation and when they finally emerge from isolation they're a bit off in the head.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

sirlynchmob wrote:
To be fair though, God comes from a broken home. He never had any parents, not even foster care nor a orphanage to teach him right and wrong.

Listen to yourself, dissing Joseph and Mary like that!

**sirlynchmob**

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
To be fair though, God comes from a broken home. He never had any parents, not even foster care nor a orphanage to teach him right and wrong.

Listen to yourself, dissing Joseph and Mary like that!

That was untold countless eons between god coming into being and that event. God probably just did it so he could finally have a sense of family and belonging

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

sirlynchmob wrote:
That was untold countless eons between god coming into being and that event.

Yeah. But remember, god is omniscient. He already knows the future. He already had memories of those moments yet to come. So, no excuses for him

.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, was not God supposed to always have been? Did he actually came to being?

**Prestor Jon**

FoWPlayerDeathOfUS.TDs wrote:
If you read the thread previously you would realize that religion wasnt his reason. He was constantly angry and finally snapped.

Back to the question I was asking though- what legal precedents would it violate? I can think of part 2 of the lemon test, but that is about it.

FoWPlayerDeathOfUS.TDs wrote:
Darn it, now they are going to call this guy a militant atheist. Why cant dawkins be the militant atheist?

Temp thread hijack. Seperation of church and state- My school is performing an opera using a bunch of religious music- however, the chorus director- she is writing the opera around musical pieces. So she is writing the plot which is roughly outlined as follows. A girl whos name is sinner has a visitor one day named grace. She says that she has a message from god. Temptation(a guy) kills her, and she gets redeemed and goes to heaven.

She has worked on this opera during her work hours. She has gotten a grant from the school board. Students who are part of the chorus work on details during study halls and out of school.

Is this violating seperation of church in state?

Nope. It violates nothing. It could conceivably be in poor taste if students and/or parents find it objectionable but writing a fictional play/opera for a school performance is entirely different from forced religious indoctrination of students. My english lit class read Angels in America in high school, that's a play that involves God, angels, AIDS, homosexuality, etc. and that fact that it has some relgious content and context did not infringe on anyone's personal beliefs or force anyone to participate in a religion against their will. Religion is just an idea and being exposed to ideas and theories is part of an education. I also had to read Huck Finn in school, since Mark Twain put the "n word" in it multiple times does that mean that I and all my classmates who also read it are now racists? Of course not. If my kids' math teacher used a demo game of WH40K to highlight probability and other aspects of math that wouldn't mean that my kids were going to become 40K players or that they consequently wouldn't play WarmaHordes or Malifaux.

It is perfectly legal to have religion in public schools as long as the school doesn't require students to perform religious acts. My kids go to public school, every morning after the pledge of allegiance there is a moment of silence during which any student/faculty member can take the time to silently pray. Every day in the cafeteria some of our kids' friends say grace before they eat, there's nothing illegal about it. Faculty and students can wear religoius iconography/jewelry there's nothing illegal about that either. Everyone is free to hold the personal relgious beliefs of their choice and students can be exposed to religious ideas/themes. It happens in schools all across America throughout the school year and nobody is harmed by it in any way.

**reds8n**

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/wife-alleged-n-c-shooter-believed-everyone-was-equal/

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. - The man accused of murdering three of his neighbors was a "champion of Second Amendment rights" who "believed everyone is equal," according to his wife and her attorneys.

Karen Hicks, flanked by attorneys Rob Maitland and Michelle English, told reporters Wednesday that she and suspect Craig Hicks had been married seven years and that the shooting he is accused of "had nothing to do with religion...but was in fact related to the long-standing parking disputes" with his Muslim neighbors.

Craig Hicks, 46, has been charged with three counts of first-degree murder for allegedly shooting Deah Shaddy Barakat, 23, his wife, Yusor Mohammad, 21, and her sister, Razan Mohammad Abu-Salha, 19, at their Chapel Hill apartment.
Attorney English told reporters that Craig Hicks carried a weapon and had a concealed carry permit, and that he was "a champion for Second Amendment rights." Attorney Maitland said that Hicks "had a problem with many of his neighbors," and that the shooting "highlights the importance of access to mental health care services." He would not comment on a reporter's questions about whether Hicks had a history of mental health issues, but said, "obviously, it is not within the range of normal behavior for someone to shoot three people over parking issues."

The father of the two female victims has told reporters that he believes his children were targeted because of their Muslim faith. He told the Raleigh News and Observer that his daughter had previously told him that Hicks "hates us for what we are and how we look."
But police have said they believe the shooting may have been sparked by the parking dispute Karen Hicks mentioned.

Attorney Rob Maitland told reporters that Hicks had "unsuccessfully" attempted to address the parking problem with the home-owners association at the complex where he lived.

Maitland said that the shootings stemmed from "the mundane issue of this man being frustrated day in and day out with not being able to park where he wanted to park. And these victims were at the wrong time and the wrong place."

**Kanluwen**

Of course he was "a champion of Second Amendment Rights"...

Way to taint the jury pool, lady.

**Frazzled**

the shrouded lord wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
the shrouded lord wrote:
Frazzled i I burnt any kind of holly book and put my adress with it we both know I would be murdered multiple times.

You have books made from Holly?

ink is the blood of christ. to far?

No no. Port is the blood of Christ. And its 18.7% alcohol by volume. Get it right!

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

Frazzled wrote:
And its 18.7% alcohol by volume.

Damn I hope Jesus was not driving that night!

**Frazzled**

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
To be fair though, God comes from a broken home. He never had any parents, not even foster care nor a orphanage to teach him right and wrong.

Listen to yourself, dissing Joseph and Mary like that!

If you want to have some weird internet anti Christian circle jerk why don't you get a room already. You're not being edgy. you're being angsty teeny. And frankly it has nothing to do with the OP.

Frazzled wrote:
Burn a Bible-all it will do is let everyone know how much of a er you are. Oh and someone might punch you in the face.
Again, if you want to prove then now burn a Koran. Put it on youtube along with your physical address. What could go wrong?

I laugh at your persecution complex. No, you are not unjustly oppressed.

I am a Texan. We are not the oppressed. We are the oppressors!

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
And its 18.7% alcohol by volume.

Damn I hope Jesus was not driving that night!

he doesn't have to drive. He just takes the short cut to get to his flat across the lake...

**motyak**

Indeed, this thread is about this sad crime and the information surrounding it. Mutual backpats about mocking a religion, or self backpats about edgy book burning, are definitely OT